Kelly A Leary1, Kuan-Ting Lin1, Juan P Steibel2, Christine D Harman1, András M Komáromy1. 1. Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA. 2. Department of Animal Science & Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate safety and efficacy of topically administered 0.02% netarsudil ophthalmic solution (Rhopressa™; Aerie Pharmaceutical) in normal and glaucomatous dogs with ADAMTS10-open-angle glaucoma (ADAMTS10-OAG). ANIMALS STUDIED: Five normal and 5 glaucomatous Beagle dogs with ADAMTS10-OAG. PROCEDURES: In each dog, left or right eye was randomly selected for netarsudil treatment. Contralateral eyes were sham-treated with balanced salt solution (BSS). Following a 1-week baseline period, dogs were treated once daily (q24h) during week 2, and twice daily (q12h) during week 3; week 4 served as washout period. Efficacy was measured by diurnal intraocular pressure (IOP) and pupil diameter. Safety was assessed by routine ophthalmic examination, gonioscopy, and pachymetry. Differences in least square means of quantitative outcome measures were compared between netarsudil and BSS sham-treated eyes by linear Gaussian model. RESULTS: Baseline IOPs were 18.5 ± 0.5 mm Hg (mean ± SEM) in normal and 27.8 ± 1.0 mm Hg in OAG dogs. Even though mean IOPs were lower in netarsudil- vs sham-treated eyes, the overall differences were neither significant nor clinically relevant, regardless of treatment frequency (q24h-normal: sham 16.4 ± 1.1 mm Hg vs treatment 15.6 ± 1.0 mm Hg; q24hr-OAG: sham 25.8 ± 2.3 mm Hg vs. treatment 25.7 ± 2.4 mm Hg; q12hr-normal: sham 15.4 ± 0.8 mm Hg vs. treatment 14.4 ± 0.8 mm Hg; q12hr-OAG: sham 26.3 ± 1.7 mm Hg vs. treatment 25.4 ± 1.8 mm Hg). Netarsudil administration was well tolerated but resulted in significant, moderate-to-severe conjunctival hyperemia (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Once or twice daily administration of netarsudil resulted in marginal and clinically irrelevant IOP decreases in normal and OAG-affected dogs. Except for conjunctival hyperemia, the drug was well tolerated.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate safety and efficacy of topically administered 0.02% netarsudil ophthalmic solution (Rhopressa™; Aerie Pharmaceutical) in normal and glaucomatous dogs with ADAMTS10-open-angle glaucoma (ADAMTS10-OAG). ANIMALS STUDIED: Five normal and 5 glaucomatous Beagle dogs with ADAMTS10-OAG. PROCEDURES: In each dog, left or right eye was randomly selected for netarsudil treatment. Contralateral eyes were sham-treated with balanced salt solution (BSS). Following a 1-week baseline period, dogs were treated once daily (q24h) during week 2, and twice daily (q12h) during week 3; week 4 served as washout period. Efficacy was measured by diurnal intraocular pressure (IOP) and pupil diameter. Safety was assessed by routine ophthalmic examination, gonioscopy, and pachymetry. Differences in least square means of quantitative outcome measures were compared between netarsudil and BSS sham-treated eyes by linear Gaussian model. RESULTS: Baseline IOPs were 18.5 ± 0.5 mm Hg (mean ± SEM) in normal and 27.8 ± 1.0 mm Hg in OAG dogs. Even though mean IOPs were lower in netarsudil- vs sham-treated eyes, the overall differences were neither significant nor clinically relevant, regardless of treatment frequency (q24h-normal: sham 16.4 ± 1.1 mm Hg vs treatment 15.6 ± 1.0 mm Hg; q24hr-OAG: sham 25.8 ± 2.3 mm Hg vs. treatment 25.7 ± 2.4 mm Hg; q12hr-normal: sham 15.4 ± 0.8 mm Hg vs. treatment 14.4 ± 0.8 mm Hg; q12hr-OAG: sham 26.3 ± 1.7 mm Hg vs. treatment 25.4 ± 1.8 mm Hg). Netarsudil administration was well tolerated but resulted in significant, moderate-to-severe conjunctival hyperemia (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Once or twice daily administration of netarsudil resulted in marginal and clinically irrelevant IOP decreases in normal and OAG-affected dogs. Except for conjunctival hyperemia, the drug was well tolerated.
Authors: Sanjay Asrani; Alan L Robin; Janet B Serle; Richard A Lewis; Dale W Usner; Casey C Kopczynski; Theresa Heah Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-06-21 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Jill M Sturdivant; Susan M Royalty; Cheng-Wen Lin; Lori A Moore; Jeffrey D Yingling; Carmen L Laethem; Bryan Sherman; Geoffrey R Heintzelman; Casey C Kopczynski; Mitchell A deLong Journal: Bioorg Med Chem Lett Date: 2016-04-01 Impact factor: 2.823
Authors: Guorong Li; Dibyendu Mukherjee; Iris Navarro; Nicole E Ashpole; Joseph M Sherwood; Jinlong Chang; Darryl R Overby; Fan Yuan; Pedro Gonzalez; Casey C Kopczynski; Sina Farsiu; W Daniel Stamer Journal: Eur J Pharmacol Date: 2016-04-13 Impact factor: 4.432
Authors: Malik Y Kahook; Janet B Serle; Francis S Mah; Terry Kim; Michael B Raizman; Theresa Heah; Nancy Ramirez-Davis; Casey C Kopczynski; Dale W Usner; Gary D Novack Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-01-15 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Albert S Khouri; Janet B Serle; Jason Bacharach; Dale W Usner; Richard A Lewis; Puiwah Braswell; Casey C Kopczynski; Theresa Heah Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-03-09 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: András M Komáromy; Dineli Bras; Douglas W Esson; Ronald L Fellman; Sinisa D Grozdanic; Larry Kagemann; Paul E Miller; Sayoko E Moroi; Caryn E Plummer; John S Sapienza; Eric S Storey; Leandro B Teixeira; Carol B Toris; Terah R Webb Journal: Vet Ophthalmol Date: 2019-05-20 Impact factor: 1.644
Authors: Kelly A Leary; Juan P Steibel; Christine D Harman; Amanda L Anderson; András M Komáromy Journal: Vet Ophthalmol Date: 2021-06-04 Impact factor: 1.644
Authors: Sarah R Michalak; Soohyun Kim; Sangwan Park; M Isabel Casanova; Morgan A W Bowman; Michelle Ferneding; Brian C Leonard; Kathryn L Good; Jennifer Y Li; Sara M Thomasy Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 3.048